opens Jundroo front door wearing a welcome sign while holding a tray of tea and biscuits
Oh wait... wrong protocol runs back inside and slams the door closed
@JohnnyBoythePilot I think the F-35 is a great airframe and they made the best out of an awkward design spec for it. It's not easy designing one aircraft with three roles in mind.
.
I must admit that I'm a bit cautious about the whole afterburner thing. For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. Meaning if you need afterburner to get you sufficient thrust to get above a Mach number, then you need it to stay there too. I imagine they use afterburner to get to the supercruise speed quicker though as I imagine it would take a while to reach such a speed one the extra drag from transonic speeds starts to take hold.
.
There are actually a surprising number of aircraft that are capable of supercruise. I'm pretty sure the English Electric Lightning was capable of achieving supercruise, so while a great bonus to the aircraft, it's not as big of an achievement as it first appears to be (although that's still a big engineering achievement).
.
I think what you're thinking about with taxiing is using extra thrust to overcome rolling friction from the tires.
But seriously, I'd say it's advantageous in that you get to know people in the community faster, thus making more friends, etc. As well as that you get to know the rest of the epic mod team, talk to the devs on occasion (who I can confirm are really really nice), etc. It's nice to have a constant in life and feel that you're playing an integral role in the community.
.
I haven't been massively active as a mod in the last couple years due to a few personal issues. But I try to put in 15-30 minutes of moderating on weekdays during my lunch break.
.
Downsides are that if you mess up, everybody hears about it. It's not fun to be on the receiving end of loads of constructive and simultaneously non constructive criticism all at once. There's been a couple of times I've been objectively in the wrong for things by letting some petty emotions get in the way and subsequently ended up making situations worse. Then other mods have had to step in to clear up the mess.
.
A personal downside for me is wondering if I'm doing it right. I'm my worst critic and occasionally I'll do things and think "was that too far?" or "did I let them off too lightly?". Needless to say it leaks into other aspects of moderating, so I can't help but wonder if the dev team thinks I'm a good moderator or not. Rationally speaking, I imagine they would have kicked me off the team if I was bad at it. But, then again, what if I'm just "okay" at it and they'd rather just roll with what they've already got.
.
A personal advantage for me is that I'm pretty sure it got me my current job as a system design analyst. I'm not lying when I say that about 30-40% of my interview for the job was just talking about SimplePlanes and moderating the site. They were more interested in my SimplePlanes moderating and mod building skills than they were in my university qualification. Definitely my most bizarre interview to date.
@AchuTMM @zerogamer @MrRussianPug @TheEpicMOONHAWK @robloxweponco
.
Sadly, I won't personally be doing an android version. I have a full time job and to dedicate time to this, moderating the site, working on a start up company, etc. It simply isn't practical/healthy for me to prioritise my time like that.
.
If either of you would like to convert the file into something that's compatible with android, I'll happily send you the Unity files containing the mod. Then you can send the uncompressed version of the file to me and I'll add it to this post along with you as a contributor, so you get points for it. Sadly, that's the only way you'll realistically get an android version.
Got to love the Flanker family. You can't deny that the Russians know how to make a true multipurpose plane. SU-35 or SU-37 is my personal favorite from the family, shortly followed by the SU-34 and SU-30.
.
Needless to say, I'm looking forward to seeing where the PAK FA goes with time.
I have reserve builds that specialise in dealing with rogue players in MP. If you're a rogue player and you see a AS-XIII or an ASX-8 in the server, it's probably after you.
.
These planes use finely tuned special weapons which almost guarantee at least one hit on a target, even if it detonates a slight distance away from the aircraft it's locked on to.
@Gameboi14 To be honest, making one article spans about a week. I collect the information (usually about 15 mins a day or more depending on the topic complexity) during the week after work and then I compile it on either the Friday or weekend. This was a special case. I had originally typed up a whole article on VTOL. Then when I was about to post it, found someone had beaten me to it about an hour or so before. There was a bit more to it than that, but it almost caused me to cancel the series.
@Viper3000ad I'm not 100% sure how an electric engine would qualify as a jet engine. In order to qualify an engine as a jet engine, you'd need to accelerate air to an incredibly fast speed and the only way that I'm aware of to do that effectively is by burning fuel to rapidly heat the air.
.
You can theoretically get nuclear powered jets, but they are obviously a bit of a hazard.
.
The only stand out alternatives (and I should point out I'm purely speculating from my own knowledge with no research) is to use plasma to cause a huge increase in temperature, or to somehow use a motor that as well as creates the rotary motion/speed necessary for flight while simultaneously generating a lot of excess heat to again heat the air before the exhaust.
.
Those seem a bit beyond our technical limitations at the moment though, so I can only assume that the "jet engines" you're thinking of are actually perhaps ducted fans?
I do love watching your videos, it's nice to see everything from a different perspective. Also, your ability to control your aircraft is on a whole other level, I can see why it's your craft of choice for camera work.
.
Also @MisterT, I didn't realise I'd crashed into you on the bridge, on my end there was still a bit of a gap between yourself and I.
Hey simpleplanes, Squirrel here.
.
If you splice up a bunch of videos by Michael Stevens, you get some perfectly normal content.
.
Or do you?
. Cue music
. You see with most other youtubers, you would get a normal video. But Micheal is strange. He comes from what we know as the "5th Dimension", meaning he doesn't exist in the same reality that we perceive, but instead a different one which is simultaneously both our reality and not our reality.
.
So what does this mean for us? Well, it's quite complicated, because that means we have to look into something called M theory and when you run the calculations, well it just gets weird.
.
But how weird is weird?
. Music intensifies
. Long story short, it's pretty weird, so weird that it warps space time. So what does this mean for the spliced videos of Michael?
. Music stops
. Yes, the answer is yes.
.
Michael is so weird that he even warps the answers to questions to the point where they no longer make sense. But using quantum computers we were able to correct the answer to this and this.
@JohnnyBoythePilot The F-35 is to put it bluntly a very fat plane and fat planes produce a lot of drag. The F135 engine is an exceptional engine and provides the F-35 with a much needed boost in power and thus giving it a similar thrust to weight ratio of the Gripen.
.
However, moving at supersonic speeds gives an exponential increase in drag. All of a sudden, the engine has to work a lot harder to maintain those mach 1+ speeds. And without afterburner. Meaning the moving components and the combustion chamber are subject to higher temperatures than what the engine was originally designed for to maintain those supercruise speeds. At which point it's a bit like microwaving food. You can keep the microwave on for a duration of time, but eventually, you're going to burn the food. Its a similar case with the engine. It can keep running while it heats up, but there will eventually be a point of no return where the components start to fail.
.
Now I must admit, this is 100% speculation on my behalf. I haven't read too much into it, but to me, this seems like the most likely reason as to why the F-35 is limited to 150 miles of supercruise.
.
Edit: Afterburner is obviously done at the rear of the engine and after all the critical moving parts and thus isn't really contributing a huge amount of heat to the core of the engine.
He got banned for publicly shaming another user, name calling and because mods have had previous trouble with the user before.
.
If you want to alert someone about a bad post, let one of the mods know, don't make a public forum post on it.
@Awsomur @ForeverPie Again, as I mentioned on the other post (Awsomur you probably can't see it), let's not get authoritarian about it. SimplePlanes is a place for fun and games, not forced collective thinking. People have different coping mechanisms. Some find humour in pain, others do not. But nobody should be told how to deal with their pain unless they are causing more pain to themselves (i.e. destructive coping).
.
Nobody, I repeat. NOBODY. Wants another 9/11. Nobody wants another world war and nobody wants anything else that will cause mass pain and suffering. Sure, people might act like everything's fine. people might ignore what's happened. But that is none of your business. They cope in their own way. If you don't approve of it, that's fine, but do not try and tell them how to cope with an event as tragic as this.
@ForeverPie I'll be honest, it's pretty sad to see you go, but after reading your post, I think I understand why. It seems you tried to push yourself when you didn't want to be pushed. When one enters such a spiral, they are no longer playing the game to enjoy themselves, but rather they feel they have to prove something to themselves, which I'll be honest is the wrong reason to play the game... Or anything for that matter.
.
If part of you does want to continue with SimplePlanes, don't try and push out something for the sake of it. Do something different. Make a Tank, make a sub, supersize it, make it as overkill as possible, do anything, for the soul reason for because you can.
.
I be honest, I nearly fell into that habit of building for the sake of building, but caught myself before it got out of control. I stopped took a step back, stopped what I was working on, started a new series of aircraft (in doing so started the Aurora Project to spice things up a bit), I made Airships with massive drop down cannons and created 3 fighter jets, modified 2 bombers. And I'm still going. I have a massive backlog of aircraft that I'll probably never upload all of them, because I don't feel any pressure to.
.
What I'm trying to say is, look back at your builds, ask yourself which ones you enjoyed making regardless of whether others did. Hell, one of my favourite builds to make was a 50 part aircraft which I made to deliberately fly, takeoff and land badly, shortly followed by a flying biodegradable packing peanut. I'm not saying that building something ridiculous will reignite the flame, but I imagine you'll have a hidden niche that will.
.
Also, as @EternalDarkness rightly says, nobody is asking you to build. Just do it when you feel like it. If keeping motivation is an issue, then keep the project simple (don't go overboard with details and making fancy wings). Maybe go on multiplayer with some chill music for a bit and fly an old build for them nostalgia feels. I know I'd be happy (as usual) to do a mission or something that involves some form of formation flying.
.
Finally, this community isn't going to vanish anytime soon. Maybe you need a hiatus. Who knows... At this point I'm just throwing ideas around XD
.
But I'm no psychologist. I'm sure whatever you do will work out for the best.
@RamboJutter yes, you're correct although if you can maintain supersonic speed, you should be able to get to them under the same power from standstill (unless you're using a RAM jet). Afterburner is just a means of quickly getting to those speeds which is why it's used as standard on the aircraft you describe. You can get to those speeds without afterburner, but it'll just take a lot longer.
I'm into anything that sounds like 80s Hair/Glam Metal or melodic hard rock. So if you're into your 80s sounding stuff, I highly recommend any of the above.
@Brields95 I'm not saying you're Wong, but I think it's important to note that a lot of the opinions people have formed on both sides are on a purely speculative basis with little to no supporting evidence behind them. Correlation does not equal causation.
.
I do agree that both parties have something to learn from this though.
" I’m going to take a bit of a hiatus from writing the Weekly"
Well, bois, looks like it's my time to shine again
.
Honestly though, I'm happy you liked my rendition of the SPW and would happy to occasionally do an episode if it helps keep it running.
@Blue0Bull The YF-23 was a bit of a wild card and looks the way it does because they emphasised stealth over manoeuvrability, although I'd argue it still looks quite similar to the F-22. I mainly chose the SU-57 and F-22 as an example because a lot of people like to claim the SU-57 is a copy of the F-22 and they're both stealthy aircraft with an emphasis on manoeuvrability.
.
Obviously, there are variations within the classifications, for example the J-20 doesn't really look anything like the SU-57 and that's mainly because of the configuration difference. There are some interesting stealth concepts out there, but they never got built because they didn't fit the requirements, were too expensive, were being developed during a transitional stage in the industry, etc.
.
I personally don't think Sukhoi took inspiration from Lockheed for its design. At least not to the extent that some people imply. They were on a budget and played it safe with a traditional surface configuration from the tried and tested SU-27. It was a natural progression for them. Sukhoi would be risking their financial stability otherwise, they don't have the history of canard configuration that the likes of SAAB and Chengdu have and likely didn't have the budget to try out weird tail designs like Northrop did. If they went with something with a 1st gen stealth look, they'd ruin any chance of air superiority with the poor drag characteristics. Realistically, the only configuration they could have opted for is a delta wing or a 3 surface layout and a three surface layout would only add to the cost due to increased complexity (again Sukhoi was on a budget. They didn't have the good old soviet union throwing money at them because it no longer existed).
.
In reality, even with the standard control layout the SU-57 looks a lot different to the F-22 and employs a slightly different philosophy with again, emphasis on agility. The intakes are mounted differently, the weapons bays are in completely different locations, the SU-57 engines are mounted at an outward angle and don't have stealthy nozzles, it has extra weapon bays at the wing root, the wing and tail angles are completely different, etc. If anything, once you get into the specifics, and the SU-57 is a just a completely different aircraft to the F-22 in terms of design, with the only real visual similarities being a stealthy profile and a standard flight surface layout
@Aeromen Also notice in this image how all the "flaps/ailerons" are pointing downwards. But yes, long story short the control surfaces do behave like that on the actual SU-57. With the exception of maybe the added aileron input for yaw. I just made that up to counter the added roll of by the rudder. Also, speaking of yaw, the SU-57 doesn't have a traditional air brake, it just squashes its rudders together to create extra drag.
you can't open a simpleplanes build as CAD, you need to export it as a .obj file by using the 3D Print / Export button in the build editor in SimplePlanes. From there you can convert the .obj file into other files using programs in windows 10 and online converters. If .obj (although most programs should support it) file doesn't work, I strongly suggest converting to a .stl file as that's a fairly standard file for CAD programs.
@Tully2001 I'm deeply offended that you think it's funny that I've lost my nuts. I mean, I don't constantly remind you about the fact you've lost your marbles.
Consider having 2 sets of ailerons which are set with activators. Some aircraft (albeit mainly airliners) use 2 sets of ailerons which gradually swap over depending on speed. Low speed uses outboard ailerons and inboard for high speed.
@XjayIndustrys I'm glad you get the humour. I know my jokes can be terrible at best, but it's the thought that counts... Am I right guys?
...
guys? tumbleweed rolls by
@Tully2001 If your d̶r̶a̶g̶o̶n̶ dog has babies, can I have one?
+5opens Jundroo front door wearing a welcome sign while holding a tray of tea and biscuits
+5Oh wait... wrong protocol
runs back inside and slams the door closed
Its good, but it's not quite 1% of Goduccs power
+5@JohnnyBoythePilot I think the F-35 is a great airframe and they made the best out of an awkward design spec for it. It's not easy designing one aircraft with three roles in mind.
+5.
I must admit that I'm a bit cautious about the whole afterburner thing. For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. Meaning if you need afterburner to get you sufficient thrust to get above a Mach number, then you need it to stay there too. I imagine they use afterburner to get to the supercruise speed quicker though as I imagine it would take a while to reach such a speed one the extra drag from transonic speeds starts to take hold.
.
There are actually a surprising number of aircraft that are capable of supercruise. I'm pretty sure the English Electric Lightning was capable of achieving supercruise, so while a great bonus to the aircraft, it's not as big of an achievement as it first appears to be (although that's still a big engineering achievement).
.
I think what you're thinking about with taxiing is using extra thrust to overcome rolling friction from the tires.
But seriously, I'd say it's advantageous in that you get to know people in the community faster, thus making more friends, etc. As well as that you get to know the rest of the epic mod team, talk to the devs on occasion (who I can confirm are really really nice), etc. It's nice to have a constant in life and feel that you're playing an integral role in the community.
+5.
I haven't been massively active as a mod in the last couple years due to a few personal issues. But I try to put in 15-30 minutes of moderating on weekdays during my lunch break.
.
Downsides are that if you mess up, everybody hears about it. It's not fun to be on the receiving end of loads of constructive and simultaneously non constructive criticism all at once. There's been a couple of times I've been objectively in the wrong for things by letting some petty emotions get in the way and subsequently ended up making situations worse. Then other mods have had to step in to clear up the mess.
.
A personal downside for me is wondering if I'm doing it right. I'm my worst critic and occasionally I'll do things and think "was that too far?" or "did I let them off too lightly?". Needless to say it leaks into other aspects of moderating, so I can't help but wonder if the dev team thinks I'm a good moderator or not. Rationally speaking, I imagine they would have kicked me off the team if I was bad at it. But, then again, what if I'm just "okay" at it and they'd rather just roll with what they've already got.
.
A personal advantage for me is that I'm pretty sure it got me my current job as a system design analyst. I'm not lying when I say that about 30-40% of my interview for the job was just talking about SimplePlanes and moderating the site. They were more interested in my SimplePlanes moderating and mod building skills than they were in my university qualification. Definitely my most bizarre interview to date.
I definitely didn't make those tags
+5Now I want to make a plane with a landing gear sprouting out the butt.
+5Removed the rule breaking parts of your post (not allowed to ask for upvotes). and made it so your images are visible.
+5@AchuTMM @zerogamer @MrRussianPug @TheEpicMOONHAWK @robloxweponco
+5.
Sadly, I won't personally be doing an android version. I have a full time job and to dedicate time to this, moderating the site, working on a start up company, etc. It simply isn't practical/healthy for me to prioritise my time like that.
.
If either of you would like to convert the file into something that's compatible with android, I'll happily send you the Unity files containing the mod. Then you can send the uncompressed version of the file to me and I'll add it to this post along with you as a contributor, so you get points for it. Sadly, that's the only way you'll realistically get an android version.
My life savings of £12.15
+5Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down, never gonna run around and desert you
+5#2018RickRollsCPRClassC'mon guys... It's common knowledge that the earth is shaped like an apple pie.
+5I too vow to banish Mr Pie in the coming months, on the premise that one is bound to act in a nonsensical and inappropriate manner.
+5Got to love the Flanker family. You can't deny that the Russians know how to make a true multipurpose plane. SU-35 or SU-37 is my personal favorite from the family, shortly followed by the SU-34 and SU-30.
+5.
Needless to say, I'm looking forward to seeing where the PAK FA goes with time.
I'd like to kindly point anyone reading this post to one I made a while ago: Why Creating a Unique Aircraft Design is Difficult
+4I have reserve builds that specialise in dealing with rogue players in MP. If you're a rogue player and you see a AS-XIII or an ASX-8 in the server, it's probably after you.
+4.
These planes use finely tuned special weapons which almost guarantee at least one hit on a target, even if it detonates a slight distance away from the aircraft it's locked on to.
@Gameboi14 To be honest, making one article spans about a week. I collect the information (usually about 15 mins a day or more depending on the topic complexity) during the week after work and then I compile it on either the Friday or weekend. This was a special case. I had originally typed up a whole article on VTOL. Then when I was about to post it, found someone had beaten me to it about an hour or so before. There was a bit more to it than that, but it almost caused me to cancel the series.
+4Sounds like a CoM/CoL issue. How close together are the two spheres?
+4@Viper3000ad I'm not 100% sure how an electric engine would qualify as a jet engine. In order to qualify an engine as a jet engine, you'd need to accelerate air to an incredibly fast speed and the only way that I'm aware of to do that effectively is by burning fuel to rapidly heat the air.
+4.
You can theoretically get nuclear powered jets, but they are obviously a bit of a hazard.
.
The only stand out alternatives (and I should point out I'm purely speculating from my own knowledge with no research) is to use plasma to cause a huge increase in temperature, or to somehow use a motor that as well as creates the rotary motion/speed necessary for flight while simultaneously generating a lot of excess heat to again heat the air before the exhaust.
.
Those seem a bit beyond our technical limitations at the moment though, so I can only assume that the "jet engines" you're thinking of are actually perhaps ducted fans?
your "ERB Vordeux" looks like it was hit in the face with a frying pan. I guess you could say I fried your build instead of roasting it.
+4@Vidal99977 cough
+4I do love watching your videos, it's nice to see everything from a different perspective. Also, your ability to control your aircraft is on a whole other level, I can see why it's your craft of choice for camera work.
+4.
Also @MisterT, I didn't realise I'd crashed into you on the bridge, on my end there was still a bit of a gap between yourself and I.
Hey simpleplanes, Squirrel here.
+4.
If you splice up a bunch of videos by Michael Stevens, you get some perfectly normal content.
.
Or do you?
.
Cue music
.
You see with most other youtubers, you would get a normal video. But Micheal is strange. He comes from what we know as the "5th Dimension", meaning he doesn't exist in the same reality that we perceive, but instead a different one which is simultaneously both our reality and not our reality.
.
So what does this mean for us? Well, it's quite complicated, because that means we have to look into something called M theory and when you run the calculations, well it just gets weird.
.
But how weird is weird?
.
Music intensifies
.
Long story short, it's pretty weird, so weird that it warps space time. So what does this mean for the spliced videos of Michael?
.
Music stops
.
Yes, the answer is yes.
.
Michael is so weird that he even warps the answers to questions to the point where they no longer make sense. But using quantum computers we were able to correct the answer to this and this.
@JohnnyBoythePilot The F-35 is to put it bluntly a very fat plane and fat planes produce a lot of drag. The F135 engine is an exceptional engine and provides the F-35 with a much needed boost in power and thus giving it a similar thrust to weight ratio of the Gripen.
+4.
However, moving at supersonic speeds gives an exponential increase in drag. All of a sudden, the engine has to work a lot harder to maintain those mach 1+ speeds. And without afterburner. Meaning the moving components and the combustion chamber are subject to higher temperatures than what the engine was originally designed for to maintain those supercruise speeds. At which point it's a bit like microwaving food. You can keep the microwave on for a duration of time, but eventually, you're going to burn the food. Its a similar case with the engine. It can keep running while it heats up, but there will eventually be a point of no return where the components start to fail.
.
Now I must admit, this is 100% speculation on my behalf. I haven't read too much into it, but to me, this seems like the most likely reason as to why the F-35 is limited to 150 miles of supercruise.
.
Edit: Afterburner is obviously done at the rear of the engine and after all the critical moving parts and thus isn't really contributing a huge amount of heat to the core of the engine.
He got banned for publicly shaming another user, name calling and because mods have had previous trouble with the user before.
+4.
If you want to alert someone about a bad post, let one of the mods know, don't make a public forum post on it.
@Awsomur @ForeverPie Again, as I mentioned on the other post (Awsomur you probably can't see it), let's not get authoritarian about it. SimplePlanes is a place for fun and games, not forced collective thinking. People have different coping mechanisms. Some find humour in pain, others do not. But nobody should be told how to deal with their pain unless they are causing more pain to themselves (i.e. destructive coping).
+4.
Nobody, I repeat. NOBODY. Wants another 9/11. Nobody wants another world war and nobody wants anything else that will cause mass pain and suffering. Sure, people might act like everything's fine. people might ignore what's happened. But that is none of your business. They cope in their own way. If you don't approve of it, that's fine, but do not try and tell them how to cope with an event as tragic as this.
@ForeverPie I'll be honest, it's pretty sad to see you go, but after reading your post, I think I understand why. It seems you tried to push yourself when you didn't want to be pushed. When one enters such a spiral, they are no longer playing the game to enjoy themselves, but rather they feel they have to prove something to themselves, which I'll be honest is the wrong reason to play the game... Or anything for that matter.
+4.
If part of you does want to continue with SimplePlanes, don't try and push out something for the sake of it. Do something different. Make a Tank, make a sub, supersize it, make it as overkill as possible, do anything, for the soul reason for because you can.
.
I be honest, I nearly fell into that habit of building for the sake of building, but caught myself before it got out of control. I stopped took a step back, stopped what I was working on, started a new series of aircraft (in doing so started the Aurora Project to spice things up a bit), I made Airships with massive drop down cannons and created 3 fighter jets, modified 2 bombers. And I'm still going. I have a massive backlog of aircraft that I'll probably never upload all of them, because I don't feel any pressure to.
.
What I'm trying to say is, look back at your builds, ask yourself which ones you enjoyed making regardless of whether others did. Hell, one of my favourite builds to make was a 50 part aircraft which I made to deliberately fly, takeoff and land badly, shortly followed by a flying biodegradable packing peanut. I'm not saying that building something ridiculous will reignite the flame, but I imagine you'll have a hidden niche that will.
.
Also, as @EternalDarkness rightly says, nobody is asking you to build. Just do it when you feel like it. If keeping motivation is an issue, then keep the project simple (don't go overboard with details and making fancy wings). Maybe go on multiplayer with some chill music for a bit and fly an old build for them nostalgia feels. I know I'd be happy (as usual) to do a mission or something that involves some form of formation flying.
.
Finally, this community isn't going to vanish anytime soon. Maybe you need a hiatus. Who knows... At this point I'm just throwing ideas around XD
.
But I'm no psychologist. I'm sure whatever you do will work out for the best.
Oh, oh. I know this one:
JamesBuildsPlanesii
+4@RamboJutter yes, you're correct although if you can maintain supersonic speed, you should be able to get to them under the same power from standstill (unless you're using a RAM jet). Afterburner is just a means of quickly getting to those speeds which is why it's used as standard on the aircraft you describe. You can get to those speeds without afterburner, but it'll just take a lot longer.
+3I don't really have a favourite, so I'll just list off a few:
Crazy Lixx
Reckless Love
H.E.A.T
Vega
Danger Danger
Crashdiet
Def Leppard
Bon Jovi
Confess
One Desire
Maverick
Hardcore Superstar
Guns n Roses
Poison
Motley Crue
XYZ
Collateral
Degreed
BlackRain
The Defiants
Skid Row
I'm into anything that sounds like 80s Hair/Glam Metal or melodic hard rock. So if you're into your 80s sounding stuff, I highly recommend any of the above.
+3Cooler profile image? say no more.
+3@Brields95 I'm not saying you're Wong, but I think it's important to note that a lot of the opinions people have formed on both sides are on a purely speculative basis with little to no supporting evidence behind them. Correlation does not equal causation.
+3.
I do agree that both parties have something to learn from this though.
@Tully2001 that's worryingly specific. Is there something you'd like to share with us, Tully?
+3" I’m going to take a bit of a hiatus from writing the Weekly"
+3Well, bois, looks like it's my time to shine again
.
Honestly though, I'm happy you liked my rendition of the SPW and would happy to occasionally do an episode if it helps keep it running.
@Blue0Bull The YF-23 was a bit of a wild card and looks the way it does because they emphasised stealth over manoeuvrability, although I'd argue it still looks quite similar to the F-22. I mainly chose the SU-57 and F-22 as an example because a lot of people like to claim the SU-57 is a copy of the F-22 and they're both stealthy aircraft with an emphasis on manoeuvrability.
+3.
Obviously, there are variations within the classifications, for example the J-20 doesn't really look anything like the SU-57 and that's mainly because of the configuration difference. There are some interesting stealth concepts out there, but they never got built because they didn't fit the requirements, were too expensive, were being developed during a transitional stage in the industry, etc.
.
I personally don't think Sukhoi took inspiration from Lockheed for its design. At least not to the extent that some people imply. They were on a budget and played it safe with a traditional surface configuration from the tried and tested SU-27. It was a natural progression for them. Sukhoi would be risking their financial stability otherwise, they don't have the history of canard configuration that the likes of SAAB and Chengdu have and likely didn't have the budget to try out weird tail designs like Northrop did. If they went with something with a 1st gen stealth look, they'd ruin any chance of air superiority with the poor drag characteristics. Realistically, the only configuration they could have opted for is a delta wing or a 3 surface layout and a three surface layout would only add to the cost due to increased complexity (again Sukhoi was on a budget. They didn't have the good old soviet union throwing money at them because it no longer existed).
.
In reality, even with the standard control layout the SU-57 looks a lot different to the F-22 and employs a slightly different philosophy with again, emphasis on agility. The intakes are mounted differently, the weapons bays are in completely different locations, the SU-57 engines are mounted at an outward angle and don't have stealthy nozzles, it has extra weapon bays at the wing root, the wing and tail angles are completely different, etc. If anything, once you get into the specifics, and the SU-57 is a just a completely different aircraft to the F-22 in terms of design, with the only real visual similarities being a stealthy profile and a standard flight surface layout
I'd be willing to participate, time depending. I have 3D thrust vectoring aircraft which I would fly.
Discord: Shizzle Stix #8389
+3@Aeromen Also notice in this image how all the "flaps/ailerons" are pointing downwards. But yes, long story short the control surfaces do behave like that on the actual SU-57. With the exception of maybe the added aileron input for yaw. I just made that up to counter the added roll of by the rudder. Also, speaking of yaw, the SU-57 doesn't have a traditional air brake, it just squashes its rudders together to create extra drag.
+3you can't open a simpleplanes build as CAD, you need to export it as a .obj file by using the 3D Print / Export button in the build editor in SimplePlanes. From there you can convert the .obj file into other files using programs in windows 10 and online converters. If .obj (although most programs should support it) file doesn't work, I strongly suggest converting to a .stl file as that's a fairly standard file for CAD programs.
+3@Notaleopard
+3Advantages: It feeds my superiority complex
Disadvantages: It feeds my superiority complex
@Tully2001 I'm deeply offended that you think it's funny that I've lost my nuts. I mean, I don't constantly remind you about the fact you've lost your marbles.
+3Change the layer the object/mesh is in to terrain
+3@Al3jandro6304 what are you talking about. I most definitely didn't edit anything at all.
+3...
Honest.
definitely didn't add my comments to the post
+3@bamesNondHavingAStronkPLANESii
+3@bondulancePLANESii
+3@jamesBondsPLANESii
+3Consider having 2 sets of ailerons which are set with activators. Some aircraft (albeit mainly airliners) use 2 sets of ailerons which gradually swap over depending on speed. Low speed uses outboard ailerons and inboard for high speed.
+3@Kerbango
+3hand hovers over banhammer
reads last word again
slowly withdraws hand from banhammer with shifty eyes
Just wait until you try importing the ships... THEY'RE JUST WIREFRAME BOXES!
BOXES
BOXES I TELL YOU!
+3@XjayIndustrys I'm glad you get the humour. I know my jokes can be terrible at best, but it's the thought that counts... Am I right guys?
+3...
guys?
tumbleweed rolls by